Three-year follow-up of sirolimus-eluting stents vs. bare metal stents for acute myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND

The long-term safety and efficacy of drug-eluting stents for patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remain controversial.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 143 consecutive patients who presented between August 2004 and July 2006 with AMI and who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using sirolimus-eluting stents (SES), were compared with a historical control cohort of 129 consecutive patients who presented between August 2002 and July 2004 and who underwent primary PCI using bare metal stents (BMS). The rate of major adverse cardiovascular events at 3 years was significantly lower in the SES group than in the BMS group (20.3% vs. 33.1%, respectively; P=0.01). This reduction was mainly driven by a decrease in the rate of target vessel revascularization (12.3% vs. 22.4%, respectively; P=0.02). There was no significant difference in the rate of cardiovascular death (4.5% vs. 5.7%, respectively; P=0.67), non-fatal myocardial infarction (4.5% vs. 9.2%, respectively; P=0.16), coronary artery bypass grafting (2.3% vs. 2.5%, respectively; P=0.93), stroke (2.4% vs. 0.8%, respectively; P=0.35), and stent thrombosis (2.9% vs. 2.3%, respectively; P=0.80) between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

SES can be used safely and effectively in patients with AMI.