These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
Pubmed for Handhelds
PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS
Search MEDLINE/PubMed
Title: Polymer-based paclitaxel-eluting stents are superior to nonpolymer-based paclitaxel-eluting stents in the treatment of de novo coronary lesions. Author: Iofina E, Langenberg R, Blindt R, Kühl H, Kelm M, Hoffmann R. Journal: Am J Cardiol; 2006 Oct 15; 98(8):1022-7. PubMed ID: 17027564. Abstract: Although polymer coating of coronary stents enables sufficient loading and release of incorporated drugs, it has also been associated with potentially negative effects. This study compared the clinical, angiographic, and intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) outcomes of patients treated with polymer- versus nonpolymer-based paclitaxel-eluting stents (PESs). Sixty-five consecutive patients (70 de novo lesions) treated with polymer-based PESs (TAXUS, 1 microg/mm2 of paclitaxel; Boston Scientific Corp.) and 65 consecutive patients (65 de novo lesions) treated with nonpolymer-based PESs (V-Flex Plus, 2.7 microg/mm2 of paclitaxel; Cook, Inc.) were enrolled in the study. Six-month angiographic follow-up was performed on 54 lesions of the polymer-based PES group and 51 lesions of the nonpolymer-based PES group. IVUS at angiographic follow-up was performed in 61 of the first 70 included lesions. At 6-month IVUS follow-up, mean intimal hyperplasia cross-sectional area was 2.36 +/- 1.60 mm2 in the nonpolymer-based PES group versus 0.62 +/- 0.41 mm2 in the polymer-based PES group (p = 0.003). Implantation of polymer-based PESs resulted in significantly lower in-stent late lumen loss (0.22 +/- 0.27 vs 0.74 +/- 0.61 mm, respectively, p <0.001). In-stent binary restenosis rate was 5% versus 20%, respectively (p <0.001). Target lesion revascularization rate was 9% after implantation of polymer-based PES versus 18% (p = 0.128) after implantation of nonpolymer-based PES, and the major adverse cardiac event rate was 9% versus 23%, respectively (p = 0.032). In conclusion, polymer-based PESs result in superior angiographic and IVUS follow-up findings compared with nonpolymer-based PESs.[Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]