Drug-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents in acute myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock

    loading  Checking for direct PDF access through Ovid


ObjectivesThe aim of the present study was to assess the outcome of patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) complicated by cardiogenic shock (CS) receiving drug-eluting stents (DES) compared with bare-metal stents (BMS). Data comparing these two stent technologies in AMI with CS were limited.MethodsA total of 783 patients with AMI and CS undergoing early revascularisation were included in the randomised Intra-aortic Balloon Pump in Cardiogenic Shock II trial (n=600) and the associated registry (n=183). Patients receiving no stent or both, DES and BMS, were excluded. Primary end point was the composite of 1-year mortality or re-AMI.ResultsOf the total cohort, 652 (83%) patients received either solely DES or BMS and were included in the present analysis. Of these, 276 (42%) patients received DES and 376 (58%) received BMS. After adjustment for baseline characteristics, there was no significant difference between DES and BMS regarding the primary end point (HR 0.83 (CI 0.64 to 1.06); p=0.14). There was an independent association of BMS use with older age, atrial fibrillation and coronary single-vessel disease. DES use was associated with prior known dyslipidaemia, baseline haemoglobin level, anterior AMI and treatment at frequently enrolling centres.ConclusionsDespite the frequent use of DES nowadays, a substantial number of patients were treated by BMS in AMI complicated by CS. After adjustment for risk factors, the 1-year outcome of patients treated by DES compared with BMS was similar.Trial registrationnumberwww.clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00491036.

    loading  Loading Related Articles