Long-Term Results After Drug-Eluting Versus Bare-Metal Stent Implantation in Saphenous Vein Grafts: Randomized Controlled Trial.

Raphael Twerenbold, Raban V Jeger, Sven Möbius-Winkler, Matthias Pfisterer, Gerhard Schuler, Norman Mangner, Christoph Kaiser, Marco Cattaneo, Michael Coslovsky, Gregor Fahrni, Otmar Pfister, Christian Mueller, David Conen, Peter Rickenbacher, Franz Eberli, Søren Galatius, Thomas Engstrøm, Ahmed Farah

Journal: Journal of the American Heart Association 2021;9(20):e017434

PMID: 33032485

Abstract

Background Efficacy data on drug-eluting stents (DES) versus bare-metal stents (BMS) in saphenous vein grafts are controversial. We aimed to compare DES with BMS among patients undergoing saphenous vein grafts intervention regarding long-term outcome. Methods and Results In this multinational trial, patients were randomized to paclitaxel-eluting or BMS. The primary end point was major adverse cardiac events (cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and target-vessel revascularization at 1 year. Secondary end points included major adverse cardiac events and its individual components at 5-year follow-up. One hundred seventy-three patients were included in the trial (89 DES versus 84 BMS). One-year major adverse cardiac event rates were lower in DES compared with BMS (2.2% versus 16.0%, hazard ratio, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.03-0.64, =0.01), which was mainly driven by a reduction of subsequent myocardial infarctions and need for target-vessel revascularization. Five-year major adverse cardiac event rates remained lower in the DES compared with the BMS arm (35.5% versus 56.1%, hazard ratio, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.23-0.68, <0.001). A landmark-analysis from 1 to 5 years revealed a persistent benefit of DES over BMS (hazard ratio, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.13-0.74, =0.007) in terms of target-vessel revascularization. More patients in the BMS group underwent multiple target-vessel revascularization procedures throughout the study period compared with the DES group (DES 1.1% [n=1] versus BMS 9.5% [n=8], =0.013). Enrollment was stopped before the target sample size of 240 patients was reached. Conclusions In this randomized controlled trial with prospective long-term follow-up of up to 5 years, DES showed a better efficacy than BMS with sustained benefits over time. DES may be the preferred strategy in this patient population. Registration URL: https://www.clini​caltr​ials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT00595647.

Address: University Hospital Basel Switzerland.; Klinikum Westfalen Dortmund Germany.; Central Clinic Bad Berka Germany.; Rigshospitalet Copenhagen Denmark.; Bispebjerg University Hospital Copenhagen Denmark.; Gentofte Hospital Hellerup Denmark.; Triemli Hospital Zürich Switzerland.; Population Health Research Institute McMaster University Hamilton Canada.; Herzzentrum Dresden Technische Universität Dresden Dresden Germany.; Heart Center University of Leipzig Germany.; University of Jena Germany.
Bant logo

© Copyright 2026, Nutrition Evidence

NED wishes to thank the following organisations for their support:

We use cookies to improve your experience and analyze site traffic with Google Analytics. By continuing to use our site, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more.