Comparison of short- and long-term outcomes between Cypher and TAXUS drug-eluting stents for in-stent restenosis.

Ji-Lin Chen, Yue-Jin Yang, Shu-Bin Qiao, Min Yao, Xue-Wen Qin, Bo Xu, Hai-Bo Liu, Yong-Jian Wu, Jin-Qing Yuan, Jue Chen, Shi-Jie You, Jun Dai, Jian-Jun Li, Run-Lin Gao
{"title":"Comparison of short- and long-term outcomes between Cypher and TAXUS drug-eluting stents for in-stent restenosis.","authors":"Ji-Lin Chen,&nbsp;Yue-Jin Yang,&nbsp;Shu-Bin Qiao,&nbsp;Min Yao,&nbsp;Xue-Wen Qin,&nbsp;Bo Xu,&nbsp;Hai-Bo Liu,&nbsp;Yong-Jian Wu,&nbsp;Jin-Qing Yuan,&nbsp;Jue Chen,&nbsp;Shi-Jie You,&nbsp;Jun Dai,&nbsp;Jian-Jun Li,&nbsp;Run-Lin Gao","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the short- and long-term clinical outcomes between sirolimus-eluting stent (Cypher stent) and paclitaxel-eluting stent (TAXUS stent) in patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR) lesions of the coronary arteries.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From December 2002 to March 2005, 253 patients with ISR lesions of the coronary arteries were selected and divided into two groups. Cypher group (152 cases) was treated with Cypher or Cypher Select stents, and TAXUS group (101 cases) with TAXUS stents. A total of 262 ISR lesions in these patients were treated with 308 drug-eluting stents (DESs), including 176 Cypher or Cypher Select stents and 132 TAXUS stents. All patients were followed up for 10 months. Procedure success rates of DES implantation in both groups were observed. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) rates in hospital and at 10 months follow-up, as well as in-DES restenosis observed using coronary angiography at follow-up were compared between two groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Success rate of DES implantation was 100% in both groups. No significant difference in MACE rate during hospitalization was found between the two groups. However, at 10 months follow-up, MACE rate was higher in TAXUS group than in Cypher group (16.00% vs. 6.67% , P = 0.031). As for coronary angiography at 10 months follow-up, we observed an increasing tendency of in-DES restenosis rate in TAXUS group compared with Cypher group (29.41% vs. 14.04%, P = 0.075).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Cypher and TAXUS DESs both have good short- and long-term outcomes in treating ISR. Cypher DES proved better long-term clinical outcome than TAXUS DES.</p>","PeriodicalId":10186,"journal":{"name":"Chinese medical sciences journal = Chung-kuo i hsueh k'o hsueh tsa chih","volume":"22 1","pages":"5-8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2007-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chinese medical sciences journal = Chung-kuo i hsueh k'o hsueh tsa chih","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To compare the short- and long-term clinical outcomes between sirolimus-eluting stent (Cypher stent) and paclitaxel-eluting stent (TAXUS stent) in patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR) lesions of the coronary arteries.

Methods: From December 2002 to March 2005, 253 patients with ISR lesions of the coronary arteries were selected and divided into two groups. Cypher group (152 cases) was treated with Cypher or Cypher Select stents, and TAXUS group (101 cases) with TAXUS stents. A total of 262 ISR lesions in these patients were treated with 308 drug-eluting stents (DESs), including 176 Cypher or Cypher Select stents and 132 TAXUS stents. All patients were followed up for 10 months. Procedure success rates of DES implantation in both groups were observed. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) rates in hospital and at 10 months follow-up, as well as in-DES restenosis observed using coronary angiography at follow-up were compared between two groups.

Results: Success rate of DES implantation was 100% in both groups. No significant difference in MACE rate during hospitalization was found between the two groups. However, at 10 months follow-up, MACE rate was higher in TAXUS group than in Cypher group (16.00% vs. 6.67% , P = 0.031). As for coronary angiography at 10 months follow-up, we observed an increasing tendency of in-DES restenosis rate in TAXUS group compared with Cypher group (29.41% vs. 14.04%, P = 0.075).

Conclusions: Cypher and TAXUS DESs both have good short- and long-term outcomes in treating ISR. Cypher DES proved better long-term clinical outcome than TAXUS DES.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Cypher和TAXUS药物洗脱支架治疗支架内再狭窄的短期和长期疗效比较。
目的:比较西罗莫司洗脱支架(Cypher支架)与紫杉醇洗脱支架(TAXUS支架)治疗冠状动脉支架内再狭窄(ISR)患者的短期和长期临床疗效。方法:选择2002年12月~ 2005年3月冠状动脉ISR病变患者253例,分为两组。Cypher组(152例)采用Cypher或Cypher Select支架,TAXUS组(101例)采用TAXUS支架。这些患者共接受药物洗脱支架(DESs)治疗262例ISR病变,其中Cypher或Cypher Select支架176例,TAXUS支架132例。所有患者随访10个月。观察两组DES植入的手术成功率。比较两组住院和随访10个月时的主要不良心脏事件(MACE)发生率,以及随访时冠状动脉造影观察到的des内再狭窄。结果:两组DES植入成功率均为100%。两组住院期间MACE发生率无显著差异。但随访10个月时,TAXUS组MACE率高于Cypher组(16.00% vs. 6.67%, P = 0.031)。随访10个月冠脉造影结果显示,TAXUS组内des再狭窄率较Cypher组有上升趋势(29.41% vs. 14.04%, P = 0.075)。结论:Cypher和TAXUS DESs治疗ISR均有较好的短期和长期疗效。Cypher DES的长期临床疗效优于TAXUS DES。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Efficacy of Raw Corn Starch in Insulinoma-Related Hypoglycemia: A Promising Supportive Therapy. Current Strategies of Surface Modifications to Polyurethane Biomaterials for Vascular Grafts. Intraoperative Blood Pressure Lability Acts as a Key Mediator in the Impacts of Goal-Directed Fluid Therapy on Postoperative Complications in Patients Undergoing Major Spine Surgery. Effect of Focused Cardiac Ultrasound in Combination with Lung Ultrasound on Critically Ill Patients: A Multicenter Observational Study in China. BAG3-Related Myofibrillar Myopathy Presenting as Hypercapnia: A Case Report and Literature Review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1