Jump to main content
US EPA
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Search
Search
Main menu
Environmental Topics
Laws & Regulations
About EPA
Health & Environmental Research Online (HERO)
Contact Us
Print
Feedback
Export to File
Search:
This record has one attached file:
Add More Files
Attach File(s):
Display Name for File*:
Save
Citation
Tags
HERO ID
2064243
Reference Type
Journal Article
Title
Second-generation everolimus-eluting stents compared to first-generation drug-eluting stents in patients treated for multivessel disease
Author(s)
Minha, S; Barbash, IM; Dvir, D; Loh, JP; Badr, S; Kitabata, H; Pendyala, LK; Pichard, AD; Torguson, R; Waksman, R
Year
2013
Is Peer Reviewed?
Yes
Journal
Journal of Interventional Cardiology
ISSN:
0896-4327
EISSN:
1540-8183
Volume
26
Issue
6
Page Numbers
561-569
Language
English
PMID
24028183
DOI
10.1111/joic.12063
Web of Science Id
WOS:000327998500004
Abstract
OBJECTIVE:
This study aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of everolimus-eluting stents (EES) to first-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) in multivessel disease (MVD).
BACKGROUND:
Second-generation EES have demonstrated superiority over first-generation DES for single-vessel disease, although the merits of EES in MVD are less established.
METHODS:
A cohort of 1,285 patients (3,124 lesions) with ≥2 diseased vessels were treated with either first-generation DES (n = 1,002) or EES (n = 283). The rates of death, myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization, target vessel revascularization, definite stent thrombosis, and major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as the combined incidence of target vessel revascularization, death, and non-fatal myocardial infarction, were compared at 1 year.
RESULTS:
Baseline characteristics were similar except for a lower left ventricular ejection fraction and a lower incidence of stable angina pectoris in the first-generation DES group (P = 0.001 and 0.013, respectively). At 1 year, the MACE rate was lower in the EES group (9.5P% vs. 15.7%; P = 0.01). Multivariable analysis demonstrated that EES use predicted a higher chance of freedom from MACE at 1 year (hazard ratio 0.58 [0.38-0.87]; P = 0.009; 95% confidence interval).
CONCLUSIONS:
The use of EES in patients with MVD is safe with signals for improved effectiveness compared to first-generation DES. Randomized trials comparing new-generation DES to coronary artery bypass grafting surgery are warranted.
Tags
IRIS
•
Arsenic (Inorganic)
1. Literature
Lit search updates through Oct 2015
3. Hazard ID Screening
Other potentially supporting studies
•
Inorganic Arsenic (7440-38-2) [Final 2025]
PubMed
Considered New
PubMed
Considered New
2. Lit Search Updates through Oct 2015
PubMed
Considered
7. Other Studies through Oct 2015
Non-Arsenic
Home
Learn about HERO
Using HERO
Search HERO
Projects in HERO
Risk Assessment
Transparency & Integrity