Comparison of sirolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting stents in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis of randomized trials.

BACKGROUND

It has been reported that sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) have been more effective than bare-metal stents in reducing restenosis and cardiac events in a broad range of patients with coronary artery disease. However, it is unknown whether there might be differences between these two drug-eluting stents in terms of efficacy and safety in the setting of acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present study was to compare SES with PES in patients with acute STEMI undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

METHODS

The published research was scanned by formal searches of electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) from January 2001 to February 2010. Internet-based sources of information on the results of clinical trials in cardiology were also searched.

RESULTS

A total of 4 randomized trials were included in the present meta-analysis, involving 1105 patients (550 in the SES group, 555 in the PES group). SES were significantly more effective in the reduction of angiographic binary (≥50%) restenosis (4.0% vs 9.6%, odds ratio 0.38, 95% confidence interval 0.19 to 0.74, P = 0.004) compared to PES. The differences between SES and PES were not statistically significant with respect to target vessel revascularization (TVR), stent thrombosis, cardiac death, and myocardial infarction.

CONCLUSIONS

SES are superior to PES in reducing the incidence of restenosis in patients undergoing primary PCI for STEMI, with nonsignificant differences in terms of TVR, cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and stent thrombosis.