Rizik David G, Klassen Kevin J
Scottsdale Heart Group and the Scottsdale Healthcare Hospitals, Scottsdale, Arizona 85258, USA.
Am J Cardiol. 2008 Nov 3;102(9 Suppl):4J-11J. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2008.09.003.
Within labeled indications, drug-eluting stents (DES) are as safe as bare-metal stents (BMS). Data from key randomized, controlled trials comparing paclitaxel-eluting stents with BMS or sirolimus-eluting stents with BMS show no difference in risk of death/myocardial infarction or stent thrombosis using uniform definitions of stent thrombosis. However, these trials and other analyses indicate a difference in time distribution of stent thrombosis, with more cases of stent thrombosis occurring later (ie, after 1 year) in patients with DES--a problem to which the lack of adequate antiplatelet therapy appears to be a main contributor. A consistent finding from randomized, controlled trials of DES versus BMS is the significantly reduced need for reintervention associated with DES use. In the absence of any other differences in safety between DES and BMS, this reduced need for reintervention constitutes a significant advantage for DES in clinical practice.
在已标注的适应症范围内,药物洗脱支架(DES)与裸金属支架(BMS)一样安全。比较紫杉醇洗脱支架与BMS或西罗莫司洗脱支架与BMS的关键随机对照试验数据显示,使用统一的支架血栓形成定义,在死亡/心肌梗死风险或支架血栓形成方面没有差异。然而,这些试验和其他分析表明,支架血栓形成的时间分布存在差异,DES患者中更多的支架血栓形成病例发生在较晚时间(即1年后)——抗血小板治疗不足似乎是导致这一问题的主要因素。DES与BMS随机对照试验的一个一致发现是,使用DES显著减少了再次干预的需求。在DES和BMS之间没有任何其他安全性差异的情况下,这种对再次干预需求的减少构成了DES在临床实践中的显著优势。