IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0011040.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Drug-Eluting versus Bare-Metal Stent for Treatment of Saphenous Vein Grafts: A Meta-Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Pascal Meier
  • Emmanouil S Brilakis
  • Roberto Corti
  • Guido Knapp
  • Mehdi H Shishehbor
  • Hitinder S Gurm

Abstract

Background: Saphenous vein grafts develop an aggressive atherosclerotic process and the efficacy of drug eluting stents (DES) in treating saphenous vein graft (SVG) lesions has not been convincingly demonstrated. The aim of this study was to review and analyze the current literature for controlled studies comparing DES versus bare metal stents (BMS) for treatment of SVG stenoses. Methodology/Principal Findings: We searched several scientific databases and conference proceedings up to March 15, 2010 for controlled studies comparing target vessel revascularization (TVR) between DES and BMS. Summary odds ratios (OR) for the primary endpoint TVR and secondary endpoints infarction, stent thrombosis and death were calculated using random-effect models. A total of 29 studies (3 randomized controlled trials RCT) involving 7549 (202 in RCT) patients were included. The need for target vessel revascularization in the DES group tended to be lower compared to BMS for the 3 RCT (OR 0.50 [0.24–1.00]; p = 0.051) and for observational studies (0.62 [0.49–0.79]; p

Suggested Citation

  • Pascal Meier & Emmanouil S Brilakis & Roberto Corti & Guido Knapp & Mehdi H Shishehbor & Hitinder S Gurm, 2010. "Drug-Eluting versus Bare-Metal Stent for Treatment of Saphenous Vein Grafts: A Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(6), pages 1-11, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0011040
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0011040
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0011040
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0011040&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0011040?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0011040. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.